Thumbs Down: Barack Obama on Transportation
by Judd WileyJune 11th, 2008, 12:57 am
Now that Hillary Clinton has finally graced us with her departure, the time has come to examine the Chosen One … the Messiah … Senator Barack Obama.
A quick glance at BarackObama.com tells us that “Transportation” doesn’t even make his top 22 issues. It’s eclipsed by more important topics such as “Disability, “Rural,” and “Women,” buried in the “Additional Issues” section alongside “Arts,” “Child Advocacy,” and “Sportsmen.”
Obama’s “Transportation” blurb is the standard tsk-tsking of those currently in power, alongside the standard hope and change fluff for which the Senator is known (minus, of course, any specific details).
As our society becomes more mobile and interconnected, the need for 21st-century transportation networks has never been greater. However, too many of our nation’s railways, highways, bridges, airports, and neighborhood streets are slowly decaying due to lack of investment and strategic long-term planning. Barack Obama believes that America’s long-term competitiveness depends on the stability of our critical infrastructure. As president, Obama will make strengthening our transportation systems, including our roads and bridges, a top priority.
That last sentence is interesting. “As president, Obama will make strengthening our transportation systems, including our roads and bridges, a top priority.” Is Obama advocating for a massive expansion of highway capacity?
Clicking on “Read the Full Plan,” we arrive at a two-page PDF titled “Barack Obama: Strengthening America’s Infrastructure.” Under the heading “Revitalize Transportation Infrastructure,” the Senator lists eight key talking points, which we assume are in order of importance. We give him a Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down on each.
(1) Strengthen Core Infrastructure. Obama reprints the entire blurb from above, word for word. No mention of priority, cost, time, or any other quantifiable metric. (Thumbs Down)
(2) New Jobs through a New National Infrastructure Investment. Here Obama pledges to “provide at least one million more U.S. jobs at a time when the housing and construction industries are slowing.” Question: Why should the federal government spend tax dollars to create jobs for people who lost their jobs because of the housing bubble? Obama also wants to create a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank which will get $60 billion over 10 years for “transportation infrastructure projects across the nation.” Sounds interesting. What projects? (Thumbs Down)
(3) Improve and Modernize Air Traffic Control. Warm fuzzies about investing in technology and making the FAA and the air traffic controllers work better together. Again, no details. No mention of the fact that the FAA’s technology procurement process takes 5-7 years to complete, and is therefore fundamentally incompatible with rapid technology upgrades. (Thumbs Down)
(4) Strengthen Airline Safety and Regulations. Obama pledges to “appoint a qualified FAA Administrator who will not play politics with the safety of American travelers and he will work with Congress to strengthen the FAA’s mandate.” Essentially a political statement about the FAA’s recent debacle that left thousands of passengers stranded. No details. (Thumbs Down)
(5) Support Amtrak Funding. Obama states that, “in many parts of the country, Amtrak is the only form of reliable transportation.” What parts of the country is he talking about? (Thumbs Down)
(6) Support Development of High-Speed Freight and Passenger Rail. Boilerplate about how we need high-speed rail. No details. (Thumbs Down)
(7) Strengthen Air Transportation in Underserved Areas. Obama apparently supports something called the “Small Community Air Service Development Program,” which helps small and mid-sized communities attract new air service. Smells like a boondoggle. No details. (Thumbs Down)
(8) Modernize Infrastructure on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers. Obama wants to upgrade the series of locks and dams on these rivers. Question: Why don’t the state governments handle this? No details. (Thumbs Down)
(9) Improve Transportation Access to Jobs. A very long paragraph about how Obama plans to redistribute income from those who earned it, to those who didn’t earn it. No details. (Thumbs Down)
Next, under the heading “Improve Public Transportation and Transportation Planning,” Obama lists four additional talking points.
(1) Invest in Public Transportation. Obama wants to “re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country.” Sounds interesting. No details. (Thumbs Down)
(2) Create Greater Incentives for Public Transit Usage. An entire paragraph about how the federal tax code unfairly benefits drivers by allowing businesses to provide parking benefits of $205 per month tax free to their employees (whereas businesses can only provide $105 per month tax free to transit, carpooling, or vanpooling). In the Obama analysis, “this gives drivers a nearly 2:1 advantage over transit users.” Question: Isn’t carpooling/vanpooling driving too? (Thumbs Down)
(3) Strengthen Metropolitan Planning to Cut Down Traffic Congestion. Direct quote: “Our communities will better serve all of their residents if we are able to leave our cars, to walk, bicycle and have access other transportation alternatives.” Car: bad. Everything else: good. Obama pledges to “ensure that more Metropolitan Planning Organizations create policies to incentivize greater bicycle and pedestrian usage of roads and sidewalks” and to “work to provide states and local governments with the resources they need to address sprawl and create more livable communities.” Question: Why is any of this the federal government’s business? No details. (Thumbs Down)
(4) Require States to Plan for Energy Conservation. Obama “will require governors and local leaders in our metropolitan areas to make ‘energy conservation’ a required part of their planning for the expenditure of federal transportation funds.” What kind of requirements is he talking about? No details. (Thumbs Down)
Obama rolls a big fat goose egg on transportation. The American people deserve more than cliches, platitudes, and happy endings. They deserve a detailed plan, complete with numbers and timetables. And that detailed plan should be on Page One, not buried in the ibid.
Next we will examine Senator McCain, for whom things don’t look so good either. Looks like the old war hero doesn’t even have a transportation plan. We’ll also be examining the energy and environmental policies of both candidates.
Related Posts
Posted in Politics, Uncategorized Rage |
i agree judd. obama’s plan is very very vague. why can’t he put together a detailed file about exactly how he would go about fixing our transportation infrastructure?
we should expect more out of our presidential candidates that these bland statements about how we need to fix this and that without any details or time tables.
mccain is no better. like you said he doesn’t even have a tranportation plan, from what i can tell …..
Matt,
That’s my point exactly. Posting a bland PDF filled with cliches and talking points on your campaign website is very weak.
Sure, at least Obama has a statement about transportation (unlike McCain). But he shouldn’t get points for simply showing up to class. We should definitely expect more out of both candidates in this area.
No matter your ideology, these issues are very important. Critical, even. Americans are spending too much time stuck in traffic, jammed onto overcrowded subways, stranded on airport tarmacs, and on and on.
What do we spend our time talking about? Rev. Wright, sniper fire, bowling scores, perceptions of race, etc. We should be talking about things that matter.
The whole thing is very sad.
I used to feel the same way when politicians posted bland stuff. This is the thing though, very few politicians will ever post detailed plans. The reason is pretty simple: the more details you provide before elected, the more likely you will lose voters. Why? Because most voters do not want that level of detail. They want to know you’re either for transit or think it’s a waste of money. They want to know if you support alternative energies or don’t.
A good move I saw was with the Kerry campaign, in which you could continue to “click” down a level to learn more about each issue. It started off with the high level issues and you could break it down pretty far.
I think it’s clear that you just don’t like Obama. I wouldn’t give a thumbs down on most of what was up there. It would be nice to know more details, but I can’t imagine that any presidential campaign would list too much more.
I chatted with Mayor Rybak of Minneapolis yesterday, who is a major supporter and local player within the Obama campaign, and we got on the topic of transportation. He said he’s very excited that with the new blood we will hopefully have in 2009 (both at Presidential level and Congress), that the 2009 transportation bill could help speed up transit projects across the country and provide a significant boost to the levels of transit funding. This is coming from a guy who’s involved and liberal.
I’m optimistic and would like more details too. But I think that giving “thumbs down” on all of those points is silly.
TJI,
Full disclosure: You’re right, I don’t like Obama. I don’t like the fiscal policies he advocates. I don’t plan to vote for him.
That said, there’s a lot in his transportation plan that I would wholeheartedly and enthusiastically support if it wasn’t so vague. For instance,
– Strengthen Core Infrastructure
– Improve and Modernize Air Traffic Control
– Invest in Public Transportation
I get the idea that if Obama released a detailed transportation plan, it would allow Republicans to pick apart his ideas. On the other hand, if Obama was attacked he could simply point to McCain’s utter lack of any transportation plan, and make a complete mockery out of him. Force him to put his ideas on the table.
I like the idea from John Kerry’s campaign. Obama’s PDF talking points could be an executive summary, leading into a 50+ page document spelling everything out. If Obama did this, no one would be able to claim that he was all fluff and no substance.